Last week, an important Clinton adviser told Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen (also of Politico) that Clinton had no more than a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination. Now, she’s probably down to a 5 percent chance.... For three more months, Clinton is likely to hurt Obama even more against McCain, without hurting him against herself. And all this is happening so she can preserve that 5 percent chance.

When you step back and think about it, she is amazing. She possesses the audacity of hopelessness.

Why does she go on like this? Does Clinton privately believe that Obama is so incompetent that only she can deliver the policies they both support? Is she simply selfish, and willing to put her party through agony for the sake of her slender chance? Are leading Democrats so narcissistic that they would create bitter stagnation even if they were granted one-party rule?

The better answer is that Clinton’s long rear-guard action is the logical extension of her relentlessly political life. .."

This is how I see the democratic nomination process at this point. For all that is said about both candidates I still see strong support for HC that is discounted on every turn. Maybe the people that voted for HC just don't count.

Ashton Carter, Obama’s nominee for secretary of Defense, oversaw development of the $1.5 trillion F-35 fighter jet, the most expensive weapon system in history. Extravagant funding for the F-35 has not precluded setbacks: in June of 2014, the air force suspended F-35 flight operations when a fire broke out on one of the jets during an attempted takeoff.

Carter, who is undergoing Senate confirmation hearings, also oversaw production of $50 billion worth of MRAP armored vehicles – thousands of which were scrapped shortly thereafter. Documents provided to RSN by the Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency reveal that the U.S. government scrapped 2,417 MRAPs between 2008 and 2014. This represented a loss of over $2 billion worth of equipment, assuming an MRAP’s average cost of $1 million.http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/28488-focus-ashton-carters-history-of-wasteful-military-spending

This is how I see the democratic nomination process at this point. For all that is said about both candidates I still see strong support for HC that is discounted on every turn. Maybe the people that voted for HC just don't count.

Ashton Carter, Obama’s nominee for secretary of Defense, oversaw development of the $1.5 trillion F-35 fighter jet, the most expensive weapon system in history. Extravagant funding for the F-35 has not precluded setbacks: in June of 2014, the air force suspended F-35 flight operations when a fire broke out on one of the jets during an attempted takeoff.

Carter, who is undergoing Senate confirmation hearings, also oversaw production of $50 billion worth of MRAP armored vehicles – thousands of which were scrapped shortly thereafter. Documents provided to RSN by the Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency reveal that the U.S. government scrapped 2,417 MRAPs between 2008 and 2014. This represented a loss of over $2 billion worth of equipment, assuming an MRAP’s average cost of $1 million.http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/28488-focus-ashton-carters-history-of-wasteful-military-spending

There were people who voted for HC, and people who voted for BO and many people who voted for other candidates. Are those who voted for others "discounted"? Obviously. The process should have been an instant runoff.

But, BO has a lead over HC in the total popular vote, the total delegates, the number of states won, etc. Given how the rules of the game stand, HC has little to no chance of winning the nomination. Many before her knew when to step down, when they became a hindrance to the process of having a Democratic administration next year, rather than a continuation of BushCo.

It is her ambition, her poor judgement in the instance of knowing when to step down, which reveals her fatal flaw, the reason not to elect her.

This is how I see the democratic nomination process at this point. For all that is said about both candidates I still see strong support for HC that is discounted on every turn. Maybe the people that voted for HC just don't count.[/QUOTE]

It's not that your votes don't count- it's just that there are fewer of them than there are for Obama.

Perhaps. Why should 11 states lose the right to participate in the selection of the next candidate just because it'll make it easier for Obama's now? I do wonder if the stats were the other way around, if Obama supporters would be urging their candidate to drop out before everyone got to exercise their right to vote because he already lost.

[QUOTE=rabello;381449]Why should 11 states lose the right to participate in the selection of the next candidate just because it'll make it easier for Obama's now? [/QUOTE]

But that's been s.o.p. for all the elections that I can remember. (In fact, the Dems previously thought that a candidate would be decided upon by the end of Super Tuesday.) Living in Texas, this is the first time I've ever voted in a presidential primary before there was a defacto nominee in place already.

It's not about 'making it easier for Obama.' It's about the wisdom of continuing to divide the party after it has become impossible to win more pledged delegates, by running on the hope that enough mud will bring down the apparent nominee and create a turnabout in fortunes, all the while effectively strengthening the opposition by continually tearing into such frontrunner.

[QUOTE=hortonthrockmorton;381558]But that's been s.o.p. for all the elections that I can remember. (In fact, the Dems previously thought that a candidate would be decided upon by the end of Super Tuesday.) Living in Texas, this is the first time I've ever voted in a presidential primary before there was a defacto nominee in place already.

It's not about 'making it easier for Obama.' It's about the wisdom of continuing to divide the party after it has become impossible to win more pledged delegates, by running on the hope that enough mud will bring down the apparent nominee and create a turnabout in fortunes, all the while effectively strengthening the opposition by continually tearing into such frontrunner.

Right now, HRC is the Republican Party's best friend.[/QUOTE]

Huckabee did the same thing. There is always a chance she can make a come back.

Not quite. Even though he continued to campaign, I don't recall him expressly going negative against McCain. But even so, he got a lot of criticism within the Repub party for continuing to run even after McCain's nomination became inevitable.